Battery Project - Chairman's Statement

[Jack Waddington]

17 hours ago, STFU said:

Tell me you base your world view from information on the ICTFC Twitter feed without telling me you base your world view from information on the ICTFC Twitter feed

You say that, but I'm not wrong am I. The Concert Co was only named as such because, as I said, we're the ones providing a venue and not much more.

And the GreenPort is a ScotGov/Westminster project and we just happen to be in the area with our car park being used as an overflow on occasion for the Port next door, what happens with that, whether it works or fails, is out of our hands. We might get a say in certain things going on within, but in all shapes and forms hasn't got anything to do with the club bar just being there

[wilsywilsy]

17 minutes ago, Jack Waddington said:

You say that, but I'm not wrong am I. The Concert Co was only named as such because, as I said, we're the ones providing a venue and not much more.

So the tenant rebranded their entire business around the landlord?

The Inverness Caley Thistle Concert Company Limited with a registered office at Caledonian Stadium and the listed director being the club chairman, Morrison, was mismanaged into liquidation by Gardiner and Morrison. Yet you seem cold on anyone putting their thinking caps on and questioning the same gents on their latest, non football related, bright idea.

[Jack Waddington]

33 minutes ago, wilsywilsy said:

So the tenant rebranded their entire business around the landlord?

The Inverness Caley Thistle Concert Company Limited with a registered office at Caledonian Stadium and the listed director being the club chairman, Morrison, was mismanaged into liquidation by Gardiner and Morrison. Yet you seem cold on anyone putting their thinking caps on and questioning the same gents on their latest, non football related, bright idea.

I apologise, I had been informed that the Concert Co only had us involved at surface level.

[STFU]

1 hour ago, Jack Waddington said:

You say that, but I'm not wrong am I. The Concert Co was only named as such because, as I said, we're the ones providing a venue and not much more.

And the GreenPort is a ScotGov/Westminster project and we just happen to be in the area with our car park being used as an overflow on occasion for the Port next door, what happens with that, whether it works or fails, is out of our hands. We might get a say in certain things going on within, but in all shapes and forms hasn't got anything to do with the club bar just being there

I know you are just trying to defend the club, and that's admiral to a point, but I'm afraid you are wrong/misinformed on much of what you have said on this thread.

Read it back in full and you'll see that there's information and links on things like business and resident objections to the Battery Storage unit, as well as independent consultations that state the application doesn't meet the criteria and the club not taking advantage of pre application advice which would have highlighted issues and allowed them to consider them before proceeding.

The concert company stuff is covered above.

The CEO told us the green port was going to be huge for the club, but now the chairman is saying he can see no way it will benefit us at all.

This is not a case of giving a pat on the back and saying they tried their best, everything above is riddled with evidence of mismanagement and incompetence.

 

[Jack Waddington]

19 minutes ago, STFU said:

The CEO told us the green port was going to be huge for the club, but now the chairman is saying he can see no way it will benefit us at all.

Thats because we need the financial incentives sooner rather than later, and I think it goes without saying we all know how horridly paced major government projects are on this side of Perth, and as a result all the business involved are sitting on their hands waiting for the expected outcome.

The Battery Project, on the other hand is entirely backed by a private company that's got many similar projects on their books, and really all they need to do is secure the land and they can have the thing up and in a year or so, while the GreenPort could go on for yonks yet. We're still part of it, but its not a financially sound move to be sitting and waiting for potential investments that might never come.

[Ronaldo]

As long as VAR doesnt get involved we should be laughing.

[STFU]

30 minutes ago, Jack Waddington said:

Thats because we need the financial incentives sooner rather than later, and I think it goes without saying we all know how horridly paced major government projects are on this side of Perth, and as a result all the business involved are sitting on their hands waiting for the expected outcome.

You're reading that wrong. It's not that the green port will deliver delayed benefit.  It will NEVER deliver any benefit for the club.

[Jack Waddington]

11 minutes ago, STFU said:

You're reading that wrong. It's not that the green port will deliver delayed benefit.  It will NEVER deliver any benefit for the club.

Hence the reason we've gone to work with a private company who have lots to back them up, rather than sitting waiting for investments whether they come or not.

But regardless the GreenPort shouldn't be held against the club considering we had no choice in joining it since we're in the catchment area, and was based on what we were told would happen after Inverness and Cromarty Port won the contract. It might not carry any financial benefits (at this stage in time anyway, I can't predict the future), but at least having a voice in the immediate area in motions that could negatively impact the club is worth being in the GreenPort group

Edited November 23, 2023 by Jack Waddington

[Robert]

The Chairman was clear at the Supporters Trust Meeting that there is no way the club can benefit from the Freeport. It’s not a timing issue or anything like that, it is simply that a business like the club is not the sort of business that can benefit from the Freeport scheme and the tax breaks that gives.

That one is a total dead end for us.

[bdu98196]

[Yngwie]

1 hour ago, Robert said:

The Chairman was clear at the Supporters Trust Meeting that there is no way the club can benefit from the Freeport. It’s not a timing issue or anything like that, it is simply that a business like the club is not the sort of business that can benefit from the Freeport scheme and the tax breaks that gives.

That one is a total dead end for us.

Unless businesses that could benefit hugely from being in a Freeport zone might be willing to pay big money for a site that is?

[Yngwie]

3 hours ago, STFU said:

The CEO told us the green port was going to be huge for the club

Source? It was certainly mentioned as a good thing for the club, but huge? Not that I can recall.

[+DoofersDad]

Just now, Yngwie said:

Source? It was certainly mentioned as a good thing for the club, but huge? Not that I can recall.

In the club's last financial statement to Companies House, the Chairman stated the Green Freeport had "huge potential for the development of our site".  This and the Battery project were used to justify regarding the club as a "going concern" despite pre tax losses over £800k and net liabilities of over £1.7m.  The narrative seems to have changed somewhat.

[+DoofersDad]

8 minutes ago, Yngwie said:

Unless businesses that could benefit hugely from being in a Freeport zone might be willing to pay big money for a site that is?

Nice idea.  And build a stadium that is actually fit for purpose on a more appropriate site?

[Yngwie]

I presume that sort of deal was what was meant by “huge potential for the development of our site”?
 

Ta for finding those comments from the annual report. Regarding my question for STFU, that quote of having huge potential is very different to claiming that it is going to be huge.

[STFU]

22 minutes ago, Yngwie said:

I presume that sort of deal was what was meant by “huge potential for the development of our site”?
 

Ta for finding those comments from the annual report. Regarding my question for STFU, that quote of having huge potential is very different to claiming that it is going to be huge.

I think underpinning the financial future of the club on it might lean things in favour of my interpretation, but you carry on splitting hairs

[STFU]

45 minutes ago, DoofersDad said:

Nice idea.  And build a stadium that is actually fit for purpose on a more appropriate site?

I hear there's a stadium sized plot available up at Fairways where they were previously hoping for some Battery Storage

[STFU]

4 hours ago, Yngwie said:

Source? It was certainly mentioned as a good thing for the club, but huge? Not that I can recall.

That cover it?

[Row S]

The Green Freeport Tax Site only covers the stadium car parks and adjoining land to the North and South. The club doesn't own any of this land. Unless a secret deal has been done recently, the car parks are leased by Tullochs from The Inverness Common Good. So I'm finding it hard to see the benefit to the club. If anything, the loss of that land to development will see the stadium deprived of parking and the club hugely disadvantaged as a result.

[Jack Waddington]

22 hours ago, Row S said:

The Green Freeport Tax Site only covers the stadium car parks and adjoining land to the North and South. The club doesn't own any of this land. Unless a secret deal has been done recently, the car parks are leased by Tullochs from The Inverness Common Good. So I'm finding it hard to see the benefit to the club. If anything, the loss of that land to development will see the stadium deprived of parking and the club hugely disadvantaged as a result.

I thought Tulloch gifted the stadium back to us just before Covid, hence why it's not the TCS anymore? Does that not include the land its on/around it, or does the initial 99 year deal throw everything down the pan? Just seems a lot of twists and turns in something that seems like it should be *somewhat* straightforward

[IBM]

7 minutes ago, Jack Waddington said:

I thought Tulloch gifted the stadium back to us just before Covid, hence why it's not the TCS anymore? Does that not include the land its on/around it, or does the initial 99 year deal throw everything down the pan? Just seems a lot of twists and turns in something that seems like it should be *somewhat* straightforward

Tulloch did 'gift' the stadium to the club but not the land including the car parks which they still have an lease from the council........nothing straightforward Jack!

[+DoofersDad]

On June 13th the Club posted a lengthy "CEO Update" which included the following paragraph.

"Infrastructure improvements at the Stadium have been identified and exciting new commercial contracts have been progressed, some to be announced in the coming days including our technical kit partner and main jersey sponsor/partner and subject to legal agreements in the coming weeks, we hope to have important news about the Stadium and its environs."

To be best of my knowledge, no important news has emerged.

Click here for the full statement.

[Jack Waddington]

Battery Farm back in the papers.

[Robert]

I note the reference at the end to the North Planning Committee approving a scheme in Alness submitted by ILI. 

[+Northern_jaggie]

It will be just as important to look after cash flow until the point the revenue from the battery farm is realised. Ongoing losses need to be mitigated until that point.

ILI’s business model is to develop and sell. It wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if the ‘real’ plan is for ICT to sell the project post-development and maybe split profits with ILI. Not a bad idea given ICT would need to raise the significant at-risk capital to build the project out, but that frames the project as a sticking plaster and not a sustainable venture in the longer term.  Still, a revenue injection from such a project is a lot better than nothing and well worth pursuing imo.